Newspoll: 51-49 to Coalition

The second federal poll since the election finds the Coalition back where it started after an apparent post-election bounce in the previous poll three weeks ago.

Newspoll’s first result in three weeks, and second since the election, turns up a surprise in recording a shrinking in the Coalition’s lead from 53-47 to 51-49 – which, if meaningful, would mean an end to the honeymoon period and a return to where things stood at election time. On the primary vote, the Coalition is on 42%, down two points on the last poll and up 0.6% on the election result; Labor is on 34%, up one point and 0.7%; the Greens are on 11%, steady and up 0.6%; and One Nation are on 4%, up one point and 0.9%.

Leadership ratings are likewise consistent with the fading of a post-election sugar hit, with Scott Morrison down three on approval to 48% and up six on disapproval to 42%. Anthony Albanese’s ratings also seem to be trending from mediocre to respectable, with his approval up two to 41% and disapproval down to 34%, leaving him shading Morrison by a point on net approval. However, this hasn’t translated to preferred prime minister for some reason, on which Morrison holds a healthy lead of 48-30, out from 48-31 last time.

The poll was conducted by online and automated phone surveying from a sample of 1623, from Thursday to Sunday. Full report from The Australian here. As before, we remain in the dark as to how the pollster’s methods have been adjusted since the election failure, if at all. However, the size of the movements, and the lack of anything obvious to explain them, suggests the poll has not been subjected to the smoothing method that Newspoll must have been using before the election to give it its uncanny and, as it turned out, misleading consistency.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,157 comments on “Newspoll: 51-49 to Coalition”

  1. Fess,

    I’m actually coming around to the way of thinking that retaking the Whitehouse is not nearly ass important as retaining control of the House and GAINING control of the Senate.

    If the Dems can do those things it won’t matter if Dotard is re-elected, he’ll be not only a lame duck for his entire second term, but then, and only then, can impeaching him begin. It’ll pass the House, and if Dems can control enough of the Senate to convince moderate Republican Senators to vote for it as well, he’s gone.

    Impeachment, removal from office and then arrest by state and federal law enforcement and the whole sorry charade is over.

    The Senate is the important bit. No matter who the Democratic candidate is, if they win the Whitehouse but face a hostile Senate who will impede anything and everything the Dem POTUS attempts to do, then it may well be an exercise in futility.

  2. Mexican:

    I hope Vic is right, but I’d never have thought the UK would’ve allowed this whole Brexit nonsense to carry on for as long as it has. But here they are, 2 PMs later and arguably with their most clownish, numptyish PM in modern history.

    We live in interesting times.

  3. Dan G:

    Under that scenario I foresee a re-elected President Trump resorting more and more to executive power, and pushing back more and more against constitutional and congressional norms and authority.

    The Democrats control the House yet the WH has refused to accede to summons and requests for secretaries and officials to front committees. This would just escalate if Dems controlled both houses.

    As for impeachment the Democrats won’t win a 2/3 majority in the Senate. So GOP Senators would need to be co-opted if the impeachment is to be confirmed. And that’s even assuming the Democrats retain their majority in the House in 2020. And besides, if Trump contests the presidency, having been challenged by sane Republicans in the primary and / or the elections, he will be like Scotty, commanding an authority over the party that those remaining won’t want to challenge.

  4. I read the dissenting judge’s reasons for upholding Pell’s appeal. For all the learned discussion of legal principles, it seems to boil down to this: the majority judges found the complainant’s evidence credible and reliable; the dissenting judge did not. To my non-legal mind that is a difference of subjective impressions.

    Another point was that the dissenting judge placed great weight on Pell’s exculpatory evidence – the evidence about Mass routines, the layout of the building etc – that suggested that Pell would not have had the opportunity to spend more than a few minutes alone with a choir boy. The dissenting judge concluded that it was highly improbable that the offence could have occurred. He acknowledged that sex offenders can be brazen and reckless but he thought it was highly unlikely that Pell would offend in the manner and the time frame suggested by the evidence.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *